digitalmars.D - Re: const?? When and why? This is ugly!
- Jason House <jason.james.house gmail.com> Mar 03 2009
Andrei Alexandrescu Wrote:grauzone wrote:Sometimes, you have to leave the more spiffy features to languages like Erlang or Haskell which are suited better for this. For example, Erlang doesn't share any state by default, and in Haskell, everything is immutable. But they use very special mechanisms to make up for the problems caused by this, and that's why you can't just pick the cherries: it won't fit, it will feel unnatural, and everything will be a mess. It's a good idea to copy good features from other languages, but never forget where you come from.
We plan to add the necessary mechanisms.
What mechanisms will these be? I'm sure others are curious too.
Still under discussion. We're considering for example message-passing queues a la Erlang. Andrei
Is there any chance of you/Walter posting your current conclusions and open issues? There are many on this list, including myself, who would enjoy participating in the design.
Mar 03 2009
Andrei Alexandrescu <SeeWebsiteForEmail erdani.org> Jason House wrote:Andrei Alexandrescu Wrote:grauzone wrote:Sometimes, you have to leave the more spiffy features to languages like Erlang or Haskell which are suited better for this. For example, Erlang doesn't share any state by default, and in Haskell, everything is immutable. But they use very special mechanisms to make up for the problems caused by this, and that's why you can't just pick the cherries: it won't fit, it will feel unnatural, and everything will be a mess. It's a good idea to copy good features from other languages, but never forget where you come from.
message-passing queues a la Erlang. Andrei
Is there any chance of you/Walter posting your current conclusions and open issues? There are many on this list, including myself, who would enjoy participating in the design.
Most of the burden is on Bartosz. Andrei
Mar 03 2009